LEV429 Temptation it does not excuse sinful or criminal actions. Theology as well as secular criminal law is based on the notion that human beings must exercise self-control and restraint even in the face of the most powerful incentives to commit a wrong. Despite the demands for absolute rectitude, it is immoral and malicious to tempt an individual to perpetuate an illegal act. This is true even when the proffered temptation is merely a subterfuge as a means of testing a person's character and integrity. Such is the case when an employer deliberately leaves money unattended, within easy reach of an employee, so that he may find out whether the latter is capable of resisting a temptation to steal. An entrapper is a moral accomplice to the criminal. The ancient rabbis expressed their loathing for entrapment by condemning it as a sign of greater gravity then murder (Bamidbar Rabbah 21:4). The principal source of the prohibition of entrapment is [this verse]. The blind person is not aware of the human intervention which caused his fall. In most instances of entrapment the individual who holds out the blandishments is known to his victim. Yet the attraction of the temptation is such that the victim is blinded to the true intent of the entrapper and the potential danger to his own welfare. The young man who induces his friend to smoke marijuana by describing its blissful rewards is an entrapper. The person who persuades his buddy to join him on a stealing rampage because it is "a good way of making some easy money" is an entrapper. The young lady with a taste for expensive jewelry who is willing to offer her favors as soon as the young man proves his love with lavish gifts is an entrapper. The rabbis' objection to entrapment was extended also to the creation of opportunities for entrapment, even when none was intended. Thus they looked with disfavor upon lending money when the transaction is not done in the presence of witnesses or if no receipt is demanded. A debtor pressured for money might be tempted to deny the loan under such circumstances. An individual who deliberately offers misleading advice for selfish reasons of personal gain was considered guilty of violating the law against entrapment. The recipient of his advice, who has confidence in the sincerity of the adviser, is blinded to the trap laid before him (Sifra, Leviticus 19:14). Provocation, like temptation, may impel an individual to commit a wrong. Both are equally immoral and mischievous.